obi ezeh

Quick reminder. If you haven't filled out Toby Hopp's survey about social media in the sports blogosphere, you should even if you never comment/diarize around these parts. It'll help me as I direct the future evolution of the site, and reward/punish the progenitor of the naked man banner, whichever you prefer.

Confirmation, unfortunately. As Tom VanHaaren and this site mentioned a couple weeks back, Brandon Smith is looking for the exit:

Receiver Roy Roundtree confirmed an Internet report from earlier this month that linebacker Brandon Smith is considering a transfer.

Roundtree, one of about 10 players and staff members to volunteer at The Salvation Army of Washtenaw County’s toy shop for needy families Wednesday, said he hasn’t talked to Smith recently, but Smith missed a team meeting earlier this week and it’s “looking like” he’ll leave.

AA.com even linked it. I feel all legitimate. To restate the previous opinion: losing a highly-rated guy at a position of need is obviously bad. At least we have clarification now that Michigan will be able to bring in a recruit to replace him.

On the other hand. At the same event, Rodriguez cracked the door open for Boubacar Cissoko:

"I'm under the impression he's trying to work his way back," said Wilcher, who speaks to Cissoko a few times each month. "I know he's working hard at school."

Wilcher said Rodriguez should be applauded for at least giving Cissoko an opportunity to potentially rejoin the team.

"I think the most important thing is that Rich Rodriguez has opened up the door to the thought of letting the kid entertain the thought of working his way back," said Wilcher, who played running back for Michigan from 1983-86. "That should be focused on -- how Rich Rodriguez is not going to turn his back, and at least lets you try to crawl back and prove you can get back by going through the proper procedures."

Michigan obviously needs help in the secondary even of the very short and somewhat toasty variety, and if he manages to limp through the rest of this year without getting in a hint of trouble there might be a rewarding comeback story in there. I've gotten a couple of independent, consistent reports that Cissoko's troubles weren't limited to missing class or practice, so he should have a long way to go. I still think he's a longshot to get back on the team and a longer shot to be a contributor, but I'd love to see the guy work through this and stick, if only for his own sake.

Also, Donovan Warren is at least keeping his options open when it comes to a return:

Michigan’s defensive backfield for next year is still in flux. Teammates have raved about freshman Justin Turner, but cornerback Donovan Warren could return after flirting with the NFL. Rodriguez told people last night that Warren is keeping in contact with the coaches while gathering information.

So I'm saying there's a chance.

Kiper == Gladwell. What do you do when Mel Kiper is seemingly wise by rating Zoltan Mesko and Brandon Graham the best available players at their positions but at the same time declaring this:

Redshirt junior guard Steve Schilling is the No. 4 performer in his class at the position, while redshirt junior Obi Ezeh is the No. 5 inside linebacker among those with a year of eligibility remaining.

This isn't even an old rating; Kiper published this list two days ago($). Has anyone ever made it in the NFL after being benched for a walk-on?

Word. A couple of Florida recruits saw a small sports blog dig up photos they posted on MySpace in eighth grade. In one the kid in question is holding a plastic gun and sixteen dollars. In another, he is wearing a bandana and throwing up an ooh scary gang sign. Naturally, this was picked up by the two big sports blogs that strive daily to become Perez Hilton, with Deadspin's Barry Petchesky opining like so:

"Not for nothing have they garnered the "University of Felons" nickname," Deadspin's Barry Petchesky wrote. "I'm not saying a top recruit posing with a gun and $16 is necessarily a crime, but it's not going to change any impressions."

Raise your hand if you thought you were hard in eighth grade. Thought so. SI's Andy Staples does something unusual and fantastic by getting in touch with the two kids to get their side of the story:

Trail said he's heard from plenty of people about the hand gesture in his picture. "That supposed gang sign I'm throwing up? That's where I stay. That's my neighborhood," he said. "I've thrown that up on the field a lot, and no one has said anything." …

Trail said he couldn't believe an adult would scour recruits' social networking pages looking for embarrassing photos. "If you really care about me that much to go on my MySpace to get a picture of me, point blank, get a life," Trail said.

Where is the right place to draw the line here? The City Boyz Inc. social media pictures were newsworthy because they were current photos of Hawkeyes who had just been arrested for credit card fraud doing unsanitary things with large amounts of money. At that point it's reasonable to say "hey, look at this picture of a guy with thousands of dollars in cash." Scouring the internet for pictures of a kid with sixteen dollars and a plastic gun… eh… not so good.

Since I do a lot of media bashing around here, let me praise Andy Staples: he's been consistently useful since his hiring at SI and is a guy I look forward to reading. With Luke Winn diving into Kenpom stats on a regular basis, SI has a great 1-2 punch in college sports.

Etc.: If you have ESPN insider, Bruce Feldman asked me to argue that Notre Dame should have taken a bowl bid this year. Apologies in advance: it's strictly above the belt. Steve Hutchinson and Jake Long make SI's All-Decade team.

Personnel notes: Smith replaced Williams for the whole game, and the linebackers were always Ezeh and Mouton. On (rare) obvious passing downs Floyd came in for Smith. I think there may have been a few plays where Floyd subbed in for Woolfolk, too.

Formation notes: Michigan spent the whole game in an eight-man front; late they moved up Kovacs for nine.

Video note: there was no HD torrent this week so the quality is poor.

Let's just get to the chart.

Before we get to this, I should say that I might have lost my mind at some point in the third quarter and started shooting out minuses to particularly incensing players on particularly incensing plays and some of the numbers may be exaggerated. It's tough to say that given the end result of the game, but I kept attempting to check my desire to throw out huge negative numbers; some rage probably slipped through into the numbers.

But, yes, chart.

[A reminder: RPS is "rock, paper, scissors." Michigan gets a + when they call a play that makes it very easy for them to defend the opponent, like getting a free blitzer. They get a – when they call a play that makes it very difficult for them to defend the opponent, like showing a seven-man blitz and having Penn State get easy touchdowns twice.]

If I'd charted Wisconsin's last grinding drive that ended in a field goal and game over, man, the numbers here would have been even worse but general policy is not to chart stuff after the game is effectively over, and down three scores when the other guy has the ball with nine minutes left is over.

You rage, contrary to the above statement, seems particularly well-focused.

Yes. Most of the poor performances on the chart that can be explained by size or youth or confusion or all three. Roh was always going to get pwned by beef machine OL 100 pounds bigger than him. Brown is basically a safety playing LB. And poor Brandon Smith is a redshirt freshman with no playing experience who has flipped positions twice this year.

What positions can't be explained by talent or youth or whatever… well, you know the story: Mouton and Ezeh. Wisconsin's passing game was almost exclusively zingers over the middle to incredibly open receivers 20 or even 30 yards downfield. On every damn one both MLBs were vastly out of position and the throws were easy. The pair was also very poor in run support: Graham and Martin combined for 21 tackles. They combined for eight!

These are returning starters and redshirt juniors. They have gotten so much worse this year, and it's obvious to everyone from Bret Bielema to stupid bloggers with charts. There is not quite enough data to outright support the ouster of a coach but I find it hard to believe that Jay Hopson could be any good. Maybe he just got stuck with mugs, but Jesus these guys can't even scrape to the right hole when Wisconsin is literally running the same play to different sides of the line four times in a row. Is this a defensive scheme change? I don't think so. Run to the damn hole.

The only possible mitigating factor is that maybe I'm not perceiving some errors by the defensive line that make it really difficult for guys to play linebacker. If one of the coaches who hangs around these parts thinks this is the case, please let me know and I'll post something about it. But I don't think that is.

Q: where were Leach and Fitzgerald? They busted a couple times against Purdue but good lord at some point I think you have to put them in just in case they do better. I thought they were okay.

Is Brandon Smith better than Mike Williams?

No. His contributions were on a couple of unblocked blitzes; he was very hesitant in the run game and often got blocked into the next county. He looked like a freshman in his first game in a new system, which he is. He's still got a lot of time to get better, but having Williams on the field was a necessary evil.

Is there anything we can take out of this for next year?

Well, Mike Martin probably turned in the best game of his career. He was in the backfield a ton, picking up a sack and a couple other TFLs amongst double-digit tackles, and nearly matched Graham's typically Graham-like performance. It's just one game and Martin fell off after a gangbusters first quarter, so it's possible that Wisconsin was just not prepared for his quickness, but if he can do something half (maybe two-thirds) as good against Ohio State that will be a step towards Martin turning into the death beast everyone thinks he can be and Michigan will need with Graham off to terrorize people in the NFL.

The rest? Bupkis.

Heroes?

Graham and Martin.

Goats?

MLBs. See above.

What does this mean for Ohio State and next year?

See above about Martin. For Ohio State: doom.

Personnel notes: Leach started the game and got pulled after he busted an assignment on a third-and-five TE cross that turned into 56 yards and a backbreaking touchdown. Ezeh replaced him for the remainder of the game. Mouton started the game and got pulled after he busted an assignment on the first Purdue touchdown. Fitzgerald replaced him until he took a bad angle on a Bolden touchdown, at which point he was replaced by Mouton.

You might sense a theme here. It will be addressed later.

Other than that it was the usual: zero rotation in the secondary, Brown in on every play, regular rotation on the DL. Banks was out so Campbell was Martin's backup. I don't know if I saw RVB ever leave the game.

Formation notes: That thing where Michigan drops the MLB to safety depth, or near it, returned again. I'm calling this "Tampa Nickel":

The dude in the deep middle is Kevin Leach; you can see Kovacs just off the edge of the screen at the 35. My best guess here is that this is an attempt to replicate a Tampa 2 defense with a walk-on linebacker or Obi Ezeh, which necessitates starting him well back of where a middle linebacker would normally end up.

Michigan's also running some even fronts—I think:

Look at the alignment of the two DTs relative to the DTs in the shot above. In this defense, Brown acts as a nickelback and Michigan plays, or at least shows, two-deep with the safeties.

AAARGH Notes: argh.

Show:

How's the ichor?

Don't I ask the questions?

Just talk before I dispel you.

The ichor is dry and rubbery. If I attempt to stroke my luxurious goatee it comes off in little gooey balls that are faintly warm to the touch and smell like an oil slick with an otter drowning in it.

Dude, you are evil.

Not as evil as Michigan's linebackers. ZING!

Sigh. How about a special mailbag question?

Sure, what the hell, I just want to talk Cowherd.

Brian,

 

Defensively, I don't understand.  My biggest concern is not the big plays, but how they look.  I understand we have three walk-ons playing significant time, as well as a freshman D-lineman. Mistakes will happen. What I am worried about is the ease of which we are beaten.  I don't have a problem with Kovacs being outrun or Leach getting blocked. That is expected. I have a problem with completely blown assignments.  To get beat on a fly pattern by a guy who is faster - acceptable.  To get beat on a fly pattern because you were tackling the fullback when the wideout was your responsibility - unacceptable. That is where we are. It can't all be Rock-Paper-Scissors playcalling.  It is coaching.  They have got to get these kids in the right position.  Williams total disregard for Juice responsibility is a perfect example.  The coaches have got to figure a way to get through to him. Then if Juice breaks his tackle or fakes him out of his shoes, good job Juice.  We don't even challenge our opponent to out execute us. 

 

In a nutshell, I can be patient with the offense. Improvement, youth, blah blah blah.   I can't be patient with this defense, and I believe it is on the staff.  Coach Rod will have some tough decisions to make this offseason.  Don't know if Gerg is the answer, but position coaches should be feeling the heat.

 

Just needed to vent.  I want Rod here 5 years minimum.  I hope his delegation of defensive authority doesn't doom him sooner.

 

Go Blue!

 

Jim Cunningham

I SORT OF TALK… like CAPTAIN KIRK… if he had DOWN'S SYNDROME.

Chart.

[A reminder: RPS is "rock, paper, scissors." Michigan gets a + when they call a play that makes it very easy for them to defend the opponent, like getting a free blitzer. They get a – when they call a play that makes it very difficult for them to defend the opponent, like showing a seven-man blitz and having Penn State get easy touchdowns twice.]

It's basically the usual: pretty decent on the DL, Graham destroys, Brown does well or okay, other linebackers and people in the secondary who aren't Warren make graves. Hidden in the raw numbers is the distribution: –12 in coverage and the above numbers goes to three separate enormous busts. If Michigan does not make those busts it seems reasonable to assume they hold Purdue to something like 10-14 fewer points. If they don't bust, there is the talent, it seems, to have an average defensive performance against Purdue.

The emailer is correct that it's the busted coverages and disaster that makes this defense a disastrous disaster of disastrous proportions. Is this "acceptable"? Well… let's rephrase that into something that's less vague and standoffish. How much of this is a reflection on poor coaching by position coaches on up to Rodriguez? How much should this deflate expectations about how well this team can play on defense going forward?

I can point you to any number of metrics that suggest there are plenty of reasons that Michigan sucks on defense for reasons other than coaching. Here's a new one:

Comparing Michigan's defensive upperclassmen [ed: 3rd, 4th, 5th year players; RVB counts] not only to Ohio State, Penn State, and Notre Dame, but to the rest of the conference as well...

Ohio State - 22
Northwestern - 21
Indiana - 19
Illinois - 19
Michigan State - 19
Penn State - 19
Iowa - 18
Wisconsin - 18
Minnesota - 17
Purdue - 15
Notre Dame - 15
Michigan - 12

The rest of the Big Ten averages 50% more upperclassmen on defense.  We are dead last in the conference by a wide margin in terms of experienced defensive players.

Then you add in the defensive coordinator carousel—three in three years—and the wholesale changeover of position coaches last year and, like, doy: this just about has to be a bad defense. If it was even average it would be a miracle. The emailer dismisses the idea of youth being a factor; again, I have no idea how you can do that. The raw numbers defy you.

So it's bad and it should be bad. Is it worse than it should be considering the incredible paucity of not even talent but mere bodies on the team? I don't know. Assuming that a busted coverage is necessarily on a coach not getting his guys to go to the right spots is dodgy. It could just be that the guys they have to start are either not ready or just not that bright when it comes to football and would be mediocre backups on another team. Sometimes people just can't hack the mental side of the game no matter what.

So maybe it's on the coaches. That is a blindingly obvious possibility. But there are plenty of mitigating factors that suggest it is not necessarily the case. The only way we will find out is with more time. They've got to be a lot better next year or things will get ugly.

[Note: the criticism that Rodriguez forced various kids to get R-U-N-N-O-F-T is another show. Presumably, attrition will be normal in the future. Rodriguez's previous stop did not experience undue attrition after his transition. Going forward, Michigan can expect to get its numbers back into the pack here.]

On to specifics, maybe?

So what was with the rollouts?

Purdue was very clever. Remember this thirty-yard run?

That's run directly at Roh and RVB and linebackers because Michigan's aligning based on the hash these days and not the formation. So they've got a lot of open space if they can blow Roh off the line, which is pretty easy right now because he's a 220-230 pound true freshman. Here he's not blown off the line, he's tasked with coverage. and gives up the corner. Okay, that's not going to work. RPS –1 was born for this.

Later Michigan flips the line so that Graham is to the open side of the field:

That play picks up one because two guys have to take on Graham and Michigan is using someone else. On the first play of Purdue's third drive they run an outside zone like the 30-yarder to start, and Graham tears through it; a hold from Purdue gives them five yards but the play is basically blown up. Purdue picks up a big run later with Heininger in in an I-Form twins; it's clear that BG is the only thing keeping Purdue away from major gains outside the tackle. So it's the strong side for him.

Now Graham is away from the receiver side of the field on the formations above and the rollouts can take advantage of Roh not being Brandon Graham; the one rollout on which Michigan did get pressure was from Graham. Later in the game, Roh gets sealed away on a 19-yard touchdown by Bolden when Michigan puts Graham on the weakside and gets another excellent run when Roh comes inside a TE. (Plenty other folk—three—picked up minuses on that play but if that's run at Graham they are not likely to have much success.) Purdue made Michigan pick its poison.

Roh did some good stuff on slants and was responsible when he had an opportunity to overrun plays, which gives him that modest positive score above, but big minuses in pressure fall mostly on the shoulders of the DEs and when one of the DEs is Brandon Graham they fall mostly on the shoulders of the DE who isn't Brandon Graham. So if you apply a chunk of that pressure metric to Roh, you get a solidly negative day. I think that's a realistic take on is game and am going to incredible lengths to justify that assessment because apparently Roh's dad reads UFR, which is something I'd really rather not know. The eyebrow furrowing!

I THINK THAT'S TOTALLY FAIR

Shut up, imaginary Cowherd. Anyway, Purdue did a really good job of exploiting the true freshman defensive end in this game. I think Danny Hope has shown that he was an excellent choice for Purdue's coaching transition; he will be a success. Probably.

Aaaaargh linebackers.

I know, man. Mouton busts huge on the first drive and gets yanked. Ezeh has already been yanked and so you've got a couple sophomores out there and you're thinking 'hey, maybe this is where they show their mettle, they're gamers' and then by the end of the game they've both busted huge and the nominal starters are back in and if you go back and chalk up the number of Purdue points that came directly from the linebackers not knowing WTF they are supposed to do you get something like 14. They are terrible, and it's all mental.

This is one spot on the field where I lean towards the torch and pitchfork crowd. It could just be a couple busts and no depth with any experience, but Mouton was better last year and the vast improvement from Stevie Brown stands in stark contrast… since he's coached by Greg Robinson.

Heroes?

Brandon Graham remains Brandon Graham. Also, Stevie Brown's short coverage was excellent all day and though he missed on a couple opportunities to get PBUs he made it very tough and was a sure tackler. I'm so happy we blew his redshirt on kickoff coverage.

Warren also turned in a good day; I know it looked like he was leaving a lot of guys open during the game but I am pretty confident that those were not his issues because he was a deep half in cover-two.

Goat-type substances?

Pick an enormous busty guy: Mouton, Kovacs, Leach. And as discussed above, Purdue's game plan other than "hey throw it to that wide open guy" was focused on exploiting Roh's lack of size and experience.

What does it mean for Wisconsin and beyond?

Despite the re-insertion of the nominal starting linebackers at the end of the  game I assume that the linebacker question is an open one for Saturday and probably until the UConn game next fall. I graded Fitzgerald out at a –1 despite the crippling poor angle on that Bolden run and he looked physically capable; I'm pulling for him because he's younger, seems less prone to implode, and hasn't made me want to die more than once or twice.

At middle linebacker, I think Leach is seriously mediocre at this instant but so is Ezeh; there are no good options there. He, too, is a sophomore with a lack of on-field experience, so he seems more likely to have a light go on than Ezeh.

At this point the line is basically status quo, as is the secondary. I thought Williams did okay after a monstrously poor day against Illinois. So there's that.

I said I'd come back to this when I have video, and now I do. In last week's Iowa game, the linebackers became extremely aggressive against the run. This usually worked out pretty well. Iowa had a lot of problems running the ball, and what success they had was usually due to the NT getting blown too far back off the ball for Mouton—it was usually Mouton caught in the wash, with Ezeh flowing to a point farther outside—to flow to the ball. There were a couple instances in which the linebackers zipped into the wrong hole, but all told it was an encouraging performance, especially for Ezeh. Ezeh picked up a +4.5, his first positive outcome of the season.

Here's an excellent example of the linebacker's new aggression. It's first and ten late in the first half. Iowa's got the ball and is playing conservatively. They start in an I and motion the outside receiver in:

Here's the snap. You can see Martin already off the ball. Woolfolk has gone in motion to cover the receiver who shifted; this is man coverage:

A half-second later, Iowa is shifting the line left and running a zone stretch. It's hard to see the line from this angle but from the top to the bottom:

1. Stevie Brown is holding the outside against an Iowa TE.
2. Craig Roh has gotten sealed inside by his guy. I think this is because Michigan's line was slanting away from the play at the snap and then had to try to adjust. Look at Martin in the picture above: he's heading straight upfield. In the picture below, he's behind an OL and trying to come around.
3. Ryan Van Bergen and Martin are in a big heap of bodies, with three blockers trying to take on two linemen. They don't crease and they don't allow anyone to get to the second level, so that's a win for Michigan.
4. Brandon Graham isn't doing so hot but it doesn't matter. He may be preparing to shoot upfield in the event of a waggle.

And then you've got the linebackers, who are moving forward already, well before the handoff point. Both of them are headed outside.

At the handoff point, Roh has gotten himself a tad bit farther in the backfield. There are still no creases and no downfield blockers. Ezeh is heading outside into the crease between Brown and Roh. Mouton's waiting a bit in case there's a cutback; his designated hole is somewhere between Roh and Martin:

The handoff's made, and Mouton reads that there's nothing in the middle and heads outside. Ezeh's already in the hole, about to meet the fullback…

…who he crushes:

The key in the above frame is that Ezeh got outside the fullback, forcing the tailback behind him and into the help, which could be Roh or RVB but in this case is Mouton, who's running untouched into the path of the tailback…

…for a TFL:

Here's the video:

In real time you can hear, and feel, the crunching destruction of the pwned fullback. Michigan's been doing this for a while now. Contrast several plays against Iowa and Michigan State on which the linebackers flow downhill immediately with this, the opening play of the Notre Dame game:

Yes, they're flowing to the ball, but the hesitancy is obvious. This happened a few times.

The problem comes when opponents go to play action and two tight ends get wide open at the same time, but I don't know if that's their responsibility. With Michigan going to more man coverage since the insertion of Woolfolk at corner, Mouton and Ezeh can be responsible for the two guys in the I; the tight ends are not their problem. In an ace set, that's not the case, but at least one of them was innocent on Moeaki Disaster II.

I'm not sure if this is better play from the linebackers or Robinson removing responsibilities from them and telling them to go forth to rampage. The multiple times Iowa got guys wide open on play action waggles, and Michigan State's success with tight ends, suggest that Michigan has traded one problem for another here.

Video note: This week's torrent is in a format I can't figure out how to clip, so I'm converting it to something I know works. This process is currently scheduled to complete at around 9 PM. So no video today, unfortunately. I'll add it later. [UPDATE: Video added.]

Goofy new complicated metric note: I was convinced to try out a "Rock-Paper-Scissors" metric and tried but it didn't really work because I forgot about it 80% of the time. I will try again next week. Those will be the "RPS" +/- below; the general concept is that when Michigan's coaches get owned by someone else's playcall they get a minus and vice versa; Moeaki Disaster I, when Iowa released their TE into the seam after duping Williams into a blitz, was the inspiration for this.

Personnel notes: Woolfolk moved to corner and Williams re-entered the starting lineup as a safety; Kovacs was usually the guy in the box and Woolfolk the deep guy, but sometimes they switched. Michigan's rotation on the defensive line continued, but Will Campbell replaced Renaldo Sagesse as Mike Martin's primary backup. Not sure why, because Campbell proved he was not ready.

Michigan broke out a flat, aggressive package like so:

I think this is something USC runs from time to time called "double eagle".

You can see the NT head-up on the center and the two DTs in tight against a standard ace formation. Each guy is flanked by two linebacker-type players, Michigan is in man on the outside (see Woolfolk following the receiver in motion), and they're going to slant into the backfield. Suggestions as to what to call this welcome.

On with the show:

So… they did okay?

Yeah, they did okay. They faced 15 possessions, all of which were meaningful—though one was the time-compressed drive at the end of the first half and the last couple were more concerned with killing the clock than scoring—and gave up 23 net points. Iowa started drives at the Michigan 19 and 16 and came away with 3 points from those drives. By the Mathlete's reckoning, the day was a positive one:

An average team given Iowa's field position would have averaged 37 points given where Iowa started on the day.  That's a +7 for the defense to go with a pick 6.

Of course, that pick six was decidedly unforced, as were an array of other Stanzi misthrows. Michigan was the recipient of a number of unforced errors. Not as many as Iowa was on the other side of the ball, but here we're just evaluating how the defense did against a pretty mediocre offense. They did a mediocre job.

What about that timeout?

Which timeout?

The one right before the half.

I liked it at the time but in retrospect the upside there was very low, since there were 27 seconds left and Iowa was on its 31. Even an incompletion followed by a punt leaves Michigan with 15-17 seconds and probably 40 yards to go for a long field goal attempt. And you know Michigan's not going to get a great return. About the only thing Michigan can hope for is a punt block.

Still, if you asked me to choose between that sort of error and the ones Carr made more regularly I'd go with that one. The instinct to wring another possession out of the first half is right, and usually Rodriguez is going to be calling that timeout with 1:30 or 2:00 on the clock, in which case the risk  you take is more than offset by the strong possibility you'll get the ball back.

What about the other timeout?

That was on offense.

I'm asking about it now.

Fine: obviously you want that timeout a lot more than the half-yard you save by expending it but it's really hard to expect players to break years of training and not call it when the play-clock ticks down.

Anything else?

You want me to say chart—

Chart.

Dammit.

A step back from the DL, which was almost +30 against MSU. A step forward for the linebackers, albeit only to mediocrity, and a step back from the secondary mostly because of the return of safety doom.

So… um… delicately phrased question about Mike Williams?

Very tactful. It's hard to blame Williams for the first disastrous Moeaki touchdown. He was obviously coached to see if the TE was staying in to block and attack the QB if he did. When Moeaki set up and he reacted and Moeaki released, that was just Ken O'Keefe owning Robinson. That play caused the email that spurred the obviously goofy addition of RPS this week; these things are always goofy because I forget to track it 80% of the time I try something new. When these things occur it's not 100% on the player in question. O'Keefe noticed the tendency to blitz vast numbers sometimes (seven happened several times against MSU) and killed it dead.

I still gave him a –3, yeah. But I'm not 100% mad about it.

Third and twenty-five is a different story, there is the Robinson quote above and this still I grabbed:

You can see the TE bugging out to the sidelines and Kovacs in a deep seam zone with Warren in cover-three to the outside; Williams absolutely has to get deeper than this. There is nothing threatening him short and it's third and twenty-four. It was a huge mistake from a guy who was thrust into a new-ish position—Woolfolk was always the deep centerfield guy before—and speaks to why Michigan needed to move Woolfolk in the first place despite the evident lack of a second cornerback.

Michigan has two defensive backs and one feisty walk-on mini-linebacker. It's pick your poison.

But moving Woolfolk seemed to work out, right?

Yeah. He was tested a couple times on fade routes, breaking one up and seeing the other one glance off the WR's fingertips because his coverage was good. There were a couple errors on outs. Despite that, it was by far the best performance Michigan's gotten out of that spot all year. The Woolfolk move allowed Michigan to play the press cover man Robinson said he wanted to play in August for the first time all year, and they played it well. Michigan's going to have to hope Williams makes a quick adjustment because Woolfolk isn't moving back.

And how about Will Campbell?

Campbell got crushed backwards on two separate zone plays and basically sat at the LOS on a passing down. He was poor, and I assume we'll see Sagesse again next week. Campbell was not ready to play.

You gave a collective –8 and a cover –6 on the second Moeaki TD. Overreact much?

Hey, man, Stanzi had his choice of two different tight ends wide open for easy touchdowns. –6 coverage each, and –4 for one disastrously open receiver x 2 = –8. It's time to get serious about big negative plays. UFR is going tough love. Or something.

Ezeh… good?

So I really wish I had the video for this and will revisit it tomorrow when I do. For now I'll just have to use my words: Michigan appears to have changed their style here. Early in the year, linebackers were sitting back and waiting for stuff to develop. Here's Ezeh and Mouton sitting, waiting, sitting, waiting, against Notre Dame:

Against Iowa the linebackers were screaming downhill at the first sign of zone blocking, which accounts for the +2s and TFLs and times that Ezeh smashed a FB at the LOS and closed down a hole for no gain. I think it also accounts for a large number of wide open waggle plays, amongst them Moeaki Disaster II. I'll come back to this when I have more evidence.

Goats?

Delicately phrased comment about Mike Williams. Also: Mouton's got to stop making big errors. Will Campbell was extremely ineffective in limited time. Mike Martin showed a propensity to get blown back for the first time all year.

Heroes?

A first: I won't mention Warren or Graham first. Ryan Van Bergen's crazy hulk up after the 85-yard Indiana touchdown has now extended itself to three games. Hes only got a +5 above but when you don't get to the QB much and end up with a bunch of half-points, +5 from a DT is a good day. I no longer think of him as a weakness on the line.

Elsewhere, yes, Graham had two sacks and though he was less beastly than usual he is still a beast. And the two corners had a good day.

What does it mean for Delaware Penn State and beyond?

Michigan's new glaring hole to attack again and again is free safety, which says things about Woolfolk and the fellows trying to replace Woolfolk. The corner play should be improved; Williams should just start playing afraid of letting anything behind him forever.

The defensive line continued being functional to good, but the disturbing ability of Iowa to blow NTs off the ball on their zone stretch plays was a new development. By my count it happened six times and was the only reason Iowa got more than 2 YPC on the ground. Penn State's shambles of an offensive line has really struggled with the stretch play this year—Iowa eviscerated them, and Michigan's just-ok OL did very well—and probably won't be able to duplicate that, but if they do look out. Royster remains dangerous when he can get past the LOS. Which he cannot regularly. That matchup will be one to watch early.

I've been saying this for a few weeks now: if Michigan can just stop making huge freaking errors this defense can be okay. They made some huge freaking errors against Iowa and were still okay, but Iowa's offense was a participant in that. Penn State and Ohio State look to also be participating-type offenses, though, and Illinois definitely is. It'll be hairy. On the podcast this week I called the defense "competition-invariant": they have talent and do well when they use it but when they make an error is so huge that even Indiana can exploit it ruthlessly, so the defense kind of plays the same against everyone.

Personnel notes: More of the same. Every DL has a backup who sees considerable time; the back seven does not substitute ever except when it's benching one corner for the other.

I did offer a new thing in the "D form" column, something I'm calling 4-4 under:

Here Michigan's in it's standard undershift but the SLB is Jordan Kovacs and Michigan's aligned three linebackers as you'd see in a normal 4-3.  You could call it a 3-3-5 stack except the LBs aren't stacked (lined up right behind the corresponding DL) and you don't have the right personnel (in a stack Herron would be a safety sort) so it's not. If someone's got better lingo for this let me know and I'll switch.

Do you know what I did when Indiana had that 85 yard run?

No.

I thought to myself "I bet Ryan Van Bergen missed a check and will spend the rest of the game personally destroying the Indiana offense."

Really?

No. I threw the cat at the TV and vowed to find Jim Herrmann and find a way to blame it on him.

Ah so.

Ah so. Chart?

Ok. Chart.

So, yeah, them's the numbers.

Shouldn't those numbers be considerably more horrible?

Well, from one perspective, yes: Michigan gave up 33 points and almost 500 yards to Indiana. From another… maybe not? Diarist The Mathlete maintains some cool statistics that take drive starts and quantity into account, and they have an interesting story:

Run Defense vs Indiana

Another win for Indiana here, obviously.  Despite Michigan poor job in previous games against the run, the Hoosiers still "beat the spread" going +2 against the Wolverine rush D while the D was 3 points worse against Indiana than the average team. …

Pass Defense vs Indiana

Indiana was actually below average passing against Michigan, with a -1 while Michigan was +4 vs the Indiana passing game. …

Field Position

Based solely on drive starts, Michigan should have lost the game 30-27, indicating that the offense overachieved by 9 points and the defense underachieved by 3.

If you go back to those pace statistics from Barking Carnival that I've referenced in the past you find that the offense-mad Big 12 averaged 11.4 possessions per game last year; Indiana got 15 cracks, three of which started in Michigan territory. All of those were legit scoring opportunities. This calculation is overly simplistic, but 11.4/15 is 76%. 76% of Indiana's yards in the last game is 355, which would have been almost exactly average last year*. You can do the same for the points.

*(This year's stats are inflated by a prevalence of cupcakes early.)

Even if I do believe your statistical witchery, is it good to give Indiana a national-average number of yards?

Well, no. Underachieving by three points based solely on drive starts against a team that was 3-9 last year is not good. But all I'm trying to do here is explain the numbers above, which are really positive for the DL, meh (meh-minus when you account for the LB-caused negs in the coverage metric) for the linebackers, and terrible in the secondary. It was close to an average day given the number of drives against and the spots on the field those started and the numbers reflect that.

Through a less defensive prism: I think the circumstances mitigate but do not excuse the performance turned in by the defense. It's a bad defense with some glaring holes and a maddening propensity to let tailbacks break contain. I don't think it's quite as horrible as 467 yards by Indiana suggest.

Was it actually a pick?

I don't know, man. I've seen the stills at Maize 'n' Brew and here are a couple high quality ones from UMGoBlog, and they seem to make a case, but nothing I saw in the video was particularly conclusive either way. My initial reaction live was "that's too bad, simultaneous possession" and my initial reaction when they reviewed it was "that's too bad, they'll overturn it if they can," which they could not. The only thing I can offer is that the referee who made the call had an angle no one else did, as he was running right at the play from the most advantageous viewpoint, so there's a possibility he saw what the stills suggest: Warren had possession first, at which point Belcher came in to grab the ball but only after Warren had established possession.

If you ask me, though: Bill Lynch was right to toss his gum. I'd be livid if that happened to Michigan.

CONSPIRACY

Okay, even if it is a bad call let's not get all crazy with weird conspiracy theories. (What's that, Penn State fans? I'm ten years too late? Oh.) Michigan got called for an illegal formation on this:

This knocked out a 20-yard third down conversion and is something I've never seen called ever. Also, Michigan pissed off the pass interference fairy something fierce this offseason. So save the CONSPIRACY theories.

What is the deal with all the outside runs?

I don't know. We saw this last week with JB Fitzgerald and thought "that's why he doesn't play" but here's Jonas Mouton doing virtually the exact same thing:

Indiana also got a 24-yarder when Mouton did not get outside of the Indiana tailback. Here he's got a blocker but he's got to know his #1 priority is to get that RB inside of him so that Ezeh can flow to him and tackle.

Elsewhere in questionable linebacker play, twice Michigan was sitting in zones that should be well-equipped to thwart or at least hold down Indiana crossing routes and overreacted to the first one coming through their zone. Here's one:

Mouton did a similar thing later.

It wasn't all bad, though. Ezeh ripped out what would have been a third down completion and also sliced up into a play to stone it for no gain; Mouton had a couple moments of slithering attack. They ended up near zero today, which isn't great against Indiana but it could have been worse. Can I suggest that there are the briefest embers of hope here? We're stuck with these guys for the next two years, so their improvement will be critical.

Goats?

The two-headed non-Warren cornerback is a big obvious glaring hole, the biggest on the team. And Van Bergen's missed check was damaging, almost disastrous.

Heroes?

After the missed check, Van Bergen personally destroyed Indiana's penultimate drive, slanting into the backfield twice to crush running plays and then getting a critical second-down sack. It was a drive of atonement. Also, Graham and Martin were consistently excellent; Stevie Brown should always have been a linebacker; Donovan Warren missed one tackle but… uh… well… you know.

What does it mean for Michigan State and the remainder of the season?

Whatever lingering hopes you had that the corner spot opposite Warren could turn into a non-liability should be put in the corner and told to  be quiet for a while. JT Floyd did better than I thought he did live but still remains a timid redshirt freshman who transparently lacks the speed to be an elite corner. Michigan is going to have to cover up for him. Kovacs is okay but really slow.

Elsewhere… I'm coming around on the defensive line, at least the starters. Graham has had the quietest dominating performances ever, Martin is proving solid, and Van Bergen went all HULK SMASH after the missed check. Earlier in the year, Steve Sharik was complaining about the terrible angles Michigan was taking on its slants; I think that's something that's gotten repaired, as Michigan is slanting its ass off and leaving little in the way of creases for the opponents. When the back seven doesn't screw up magnificently, Michigan stoned Indiana all day. Yeah, yeah, just Indiana, but I'm happier with dominance interspersed with huge errors than the steady drip-drip-drip of physical inadequacy. Fix the errors and you could be okay.

Of course, physical dominance is easy against Indiana and will be tougher against most of the rest of the schedule, so this could just be a mirage. Michigan State will be a big test.

The linebackers are at least making some plays to go with their massive errors, Stevie Brown(!) excluded since he's not making massive errors.

Bizarrely, I have some hope yet for this thing to be mediocre once Michigan gets a better idea of what it's doing. The improved slanting is one step in the right direction and an indication that the defense is getting less confused as the season goes along. Like last year's offense, the youth and uncertainty of the group means they should improve more than the average unit as we go along; they could be functional against not great offenses. By my count, that's the entire league.

What did I just say? God help me.